tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post823554930149308286..comments2018-05-22T01:05:55.937-07:00Comments on The New Theological Movement: Natural Family Planning with a "contraceptive mentality"?Father Ryan Erlenbushhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comBlogger82125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-55610833046249016292013-09-11T20:08:32.032-07:002013-09-11T20:08:32.032-07:00@Lisa,
You have an amazing ability to read souls, ...@Lisa,<br />You have an amazing ability to read souls, I guess? Is that how you are able to judge and condemn thousands of Catholics whom you have never met? How do you know that they all are using NFP for selfish reasons?<br /><br />Extremists like you give the conservative and traditional Catholic a bad name ... I too believe that we need to teach about the just reasons (iustae causae) for NFP - that it is not a free-for-all ... but that blanket condemnation you spew will only make people dismiss traditional Catholicism as judgmental and narrow.Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-43239227801802240992013-09-11T13:57:26.297-07:002013-09-11T13:57:26.297-07:00Michael Vortex here is saying NFP is taught in the...Michael Vortex here is saying NFP is taught in the church today to be used like birth control........&quot;a contraception light&quot;.....people say...&quot;Hey look we Catholics can have sex and avoid pregnancey just like the contraceptive culture, but we don&#39;t use articifical methods so we are sqaure with God&quot;.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxbj73PmbY8&amp;feature=c4-overview&amp;list=UUX17igkZ9JhU64JoTBVSWeQLisa De Ruyterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02654121259327198361noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-41965095188270450722013-09-11T13:30:29.747-07:002013-09-11T13:30:29.747-07:00Married couples today are not using NFP for seriou...Married couples today are not using NFP for serious or just or grave reasons. They are using it for selfishness and materialism. They tell you straight up, that they want a house, cars, education, etc.. etc... etc.. and only want a couple children, when they decide they have all they want first.<br /> POPE FRANCIS: WYD: <br />“No, no, not more than one child, because otherwise we will not be able to go on holiday, we will not be able to go out, we will not be able to buy a house. It’s all very well to follow the Lord, but only up to a certain point. This is what economic wellbeing does to us: we all know what wellbeing is, but it deprives us of courage, of the courage we need to get close to Jesus. This is the first richness of the culture of today, the culture of economic wellbeing”.<br /><br />There is also, he added, “another richness in our culture”, another richness that prevents us from getting close to Jesus: it’s our fascination for the temporary”. We, he observed, are “in love with the provisional”. We don’t like Jesus’s “definitive proposals”. Instead we like what is temporary because “we are afraid of God’s time” which is definitive.<br /><br />“He is the Lord of time; we are the masters of the moment. Why? Because we are in command of the moment: I will follow the Lord up to this point, and then I will see… I heard of a man who wanted to become a priest - but only for ten years, not any longer…” Attraction for the provisional: this is a richness. We want to become masters of time, we live for the moment. These two riches are the ones that, in this moment, prevent us from going forward. I think of so many men and women who have left their land to work throughout their lives as missionaries: that is definitive!”.<br /><br />And, he said, I also think of so many men and women who “have left their homes to commit to a lifelong marriage”, that is “to follow Jesus closely! It’s the definitive”. The temporary, Pope Francis stressed, “is not following Jesus”, it’s “our territory”.<br /><br />Text from pagehttp://en.radiovaticana.va/.../en1-695924Lisa De Ruyterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02654121259327198361noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-39788546533650896642013-09-11T13:26:22.634-07:002013-09-11T13:26:22.634-07:00This article is dead wrong and here is what the Ch...This article is dead wrong and here is what the Church teaches on the USCCB site ...for using NFP and NFP must be used for serious and grave (just) reasons. http://old.usccb.org/prolife/issues/nfp/seriousq.shtmlLisa De Ruyterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02654121259327198361noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-23630158111318626602013-07-03T18:32:24.363-07:002013-07-03T18:32:24.363-07:00Father Ryan,
Thank you so much for this post! My ...Father Ryan,<br /><br />Thank you so much for this post! My husband and I are newly weds and using NFP because I am in Medical school and so finances are tight. I always so tired of people expressing to me that my reasons weren&#39;t &quot;serious&quot; enough but I always responded by telling them that was for my husband and me to decide. I stumbled upon this while trying to look more into NFP and what a blessing it is for the church to have given us this method and letting us decide for ourselves when we need to use it. It is not for anyone else to point what is just and serious for any other couple but themselves. I&#39;ve also never like the phrase &quot;contraceptive mentality&quot;, if we were to have a contraceptive mentality we be actually using contraception. Thanks again for the post and your wisdom!<br /><br /><br />IsabellaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-84670034747380905582012-10-22T16:21:37.368-07:002012-10-22T16:21:37.368-07:00We are blessed to have so many Christian leaders p...We are blessed to have so many Christian leaders preaching the word of God. Thank you for this article, and thank you for all your clarifications of those posting comments.<br />I have spent much time reading and praying on the topic of using NFP and sterilizations. I try to &#39;pick and choose&#39; what rules to follow and what rules I can break. I wholeheartedly believe the Church upholds the word of God,<br />But in the end only God will be the judge of my actions and in actions.<br /><br />I believe God gave us the &#39;gift to procreate&#39; and I believe we are to use that gift respectfully. I do not believe in using contraceptives so that married (and sinning unmarried) couples can be sloppy in sexual gratification, therefore NFP is a wonderful alternative where couples need to be aware of their actions. The respect of boundaries is a lesson that needs to be learned in early marriage and while growing a family.<br /><br />I condone the men and women that freely use contraceptives to avoid the &#39;consequences&#39; of sin through sexual acts, but I believe God will have mercy on me for the choices I will soon have to make to prevent further pregnancies. <br /><br />God has given me the gift of creating children. I will soon have four; they are beautiful and gracious. There are children being born everyday- not because they are gifs from God, but because people are abusing God&#39;s gift to create. <br /><br />I have been advised not to use my body for more of God&#39;s creation. My body has been stressed to its limits, and ought not to have more children using God&#39;s gift to me. I am trying to be responsible with the gifts God has given me.<br /><br />My husband and I want to add more to our family, but it cannot be through my body. If God wants our family to grow- as both my husband I hope that God does, God will send us children through other means. We will accept those gifts with open hearts.Katelynnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-36491454172929675682012-07-10T21:02:45.588-07:002012-07-10T21:02:45.588-07:00Father Ryan, if a couple uses NFP without a just c...Father Ryan, if a couple uses NFP without a just cause, do we have any strong reason (e.g. documents with Magisterial credentials) to believe they have committed an objectively serious sin?Burnt Marshwigglenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-8632522090204827812012-06-29T07:20:42.551-07:002012-06-29T07:20:42.551-07:00Father Ryan Erlenbush,
I know this is an old art...Father Ryan Erlenbush, <br /><br />I know this is an old article but I have only recently come across it. Thank you so much for this. It is a very helpful and enlightening article and the points you make in the comments are just as important as the article itself. <br /><br />Your first commenter, a priest I believe, sent a link to a homily that has made the rounds in Catholic circles of which I have been a part. I have listened to the homily several times as I am a teacher of natural family planning and take my responsibilities seriously with regard to teaching not only the method correctly, but with a true moral perspective. After reading also Pius XII address to midwives that this priest bases his homily upon, I would like to humbly submit that the priest that gives this homily is somewhat mistaken. <br /><br />There are three points I would like mention and do so while saying I am open to correction.<br /><br />First, the priest quotes from a section of Pope Pius&#39; letter that is talking about the validity of a marriage in which the couple has decided beforehand to limit intercourse to the infertile periods, the language here is very strong as you might expect concerning how serious the reason must be for such a situation to be moral. The problem is that this homily presents this language as though it applies to couples who may already have children and are discerning the use of nfp at that time. <br /><br />2. The priest draws a parallel to explain what serious reasons are required to use nfp in marriage saying we are familiar with the concept serious reasons are required to miss mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation. This seems a worthy parallel to say married person have a positive duty to have children, but not when considering the spacing of children. The result of our duty to attend mass is that we hardly ever miss mass and this is true for most people. So, should we hardly ever use nfp and would this be true for most people? I don&#39;t think so, as I can think of one reason that comes up frequently when raising a large family that justifies the use of nfp and that is that the couple just had a baby.<br /><br />3.And this brings me to my third point, namely, that this priest quotes a section of Pius XII letter and for reasons I can not understand, skips over some very critical words. The pope says &quot;Serious reasons, which NOT RARELY arise from medical, eugenic etc...may exempt husband and wife from the positive duty for a long period or even the duration of married life [emphasis mine]&quot; When the priest quotes this section, he leaves out the &quot;not rarely.&quot; I think those words are important. <br /><br />Thank you, again, for an excellent article.Suzanne Templehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02441097048770188288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-91595745824883489562012-01-12T18:47:27.079-08:002012-01-12T18:47:27.079-08:00Fr. Ryan,
Thank you for this article. Where can I...Fr. Ryan,<br /><br />Thank you for this article. Where can I get a reprint?Gracenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-1268044386454286922011-12-22T22:30:33.388-08:002011-12-22T22:30:33.388-08:00@anonymous,
Please use a pseudonym ... I will not ...@anonymous,<br />Please use a pseudonym ... I will not post any further anonymous comments (see my comment policy on the left and also in the comment pop-up box where you make your comment).<br /><br />As far as serious vs. grave ... I feel no need to enter into that debate here ... the simple fact is that Latin has two words &quot;serius&quot; and &quot;gravus&quot; ... and the word used is &quot;serius&quot; and &quot;justus&quot;, not &quot;gravus&quot; ... after all, even the new translation of the Mass translates &quot;dignum et iustum est&quot; as &quot;it is right and just&quot; NOT &quot;it is right and grave&quot;! :-) [I mean this partly in jest]<br /><br /><br />Well, I&#39;m not sure what you meant when you said &quot;this stuff is destroying marriages&quot; ... since you began your comment by saying that you never met an NFP couple who did not have &quot;the best intentions&quot; and that they are your &quot;favorite people&quot;.<br /><br />As far as the Ange and the Greg ... I did graduate from the Greg for the STB, then I was lucky enough to transfer to the Ange for the STL!<br />Still, trust me, the moral theologians at the Ange would not accuse NFP of having a &quot;contraceptive mentality&quot;.<br /><br /><br />Regarding the CCL ... let us pray that the will of the Lord be accomplished, he desires the salvation of all ... a scandal would do so much damage to the faithful. <br />Prayer is needed here ... not prideful gloating or foreboding prophecy. +Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-20022282230460228052011-12-22T22:01:37.908-08:002011-12-22T22:01:37.908-08:00Father:
First let me preface all comments by sayi...Father:<br /><br />First let me preface all comments by saying that NFP people are my favourite in the world and I’ve never met one without the best intentions.<br /><br />But.. but..I am surprised to see an Ange grad make such distinctions without a real difference. That sounds more like a Greg grad talking.<br /><br />The latin word serius means grave. To suggest there is a difference is to fall into the proportionalist trap (or at least appear to be).<br /><br />There needs to be a lot more talk on this because with so much cynicism among young people, it’s doubtful we’ll see a 3rd generation of NFP Catholics.<br /><br />We would probably agree on why people aren’t drawn to religious life (and there have been some improvements there). But we all know good holy Catholic youths who are not contracepting who have absolutely no interest in marriage. This stuff is destroying marriages such as those at the highest levels of the CCL in Cincinnati (wait till the story breaks next month).<br /><br />It’s time to consign TOB and the more gnostic elements of NFP to the dustbin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-49656630382869335732011-12-13T20:21:03.919-08:002011-12-13T20:21:03.919-08:00@anonymous,
ok, before you had said that &quot;the...@anonymous,<br />ok, before you had said that &quot;the Church appears to me to be bending it&#39;s teaching to pander to secular ideas of sexual morality&quot;.<br /><br />Now, you have made it clear that you do not really mean that ... rather, certain individuals have hijacked the Church&#39;s teaching (and also the &quot;theology of the body&quot; of Bl. John Paul II) and have misused it for their own self-gratification.<br /><br />We must never accuse the Church (or the great John Paul II) of promoting immoral behaviors ... at first you did just that, but now it is clear that you did not intend it.<br />Thanks be to God! :)<br /><br /><br />I applaud you and your husband for seeking to be true to the hundreds of years (we may as well say &quot;thousands of years&quot;) of Church teaching on sexual morality within marriage.<br />Indeed, each and every marital act must be open to life -- and this is maintained by the use of NFP as well, which is permitted for a serious reason.<br /><br />As far as your particular case -- you have asked whether you or not you are right to restrict your intimacy to only those times when you desire to have a child -- I would again recommend that you speak of the matter directly with a priest (and you can certainly feel free to contact me via email - reginaldus.ntm [at] gmail [dot] com), indeed I would recommend you speak with at least a couple of solid and orthodox priests.<br /><br />My prayers are with you and your family. Please pray for me and for all priests, that we may speak the truth on such important matters! +Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-22878631942536162432011-12-13T15:44:32.964-08:002011-12-13T15:44:32.964-08:00Forgive me if I come across in any way proud - its...Forgive me if I come across in any way proud - its certainly not the intention. Nor do we believe that the Church has redefined morality how could it? but we believe that many who call themselves Catholic have chosen to interpret Church teaching to make it more palatable to a culture which see sex largely in terms of physical gratification. <br /><br />NFP is sold as being &quot;as effective as contraception&quot; and immoral acts are justified in the name of the &quot;unitive&quot; aspect of sex. <br /><br />To illustrate the point II have read in several forum that because women have an equal &quot;right&quot; to sexual gratification. it is permissible, for a couple to continue stimulation in the &quot;context of intercourse&quot; that is afterwards so that the wife too may climax. <br /><br />How can this be right, it is not facilitating the act of procreation which has already taken place and as you say the Church has always taught that masturbation and stimulation outside intercourse is a sin ? <br /><br />The answer is not that it is morally acceptable or that the Church has changed its teaching. It is that people are trying to fit Church teaching into feminist notions of female sexuality not its true God given purpose <br /><br />As you are kind enough to say all we seek is to try to stay true to hundreds of years of Church teaching. Are we wrong to believe that the we should restrict our intimacy to that which is truly open to procreation and no more than that ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-56197480645875631332011-12-13T10:55:05.710-08:002011-12-13T10:55:05.710-08:00@David,
You ask a very good question!
I think that...@David,<br />You ask a very good question!<br />I think that the pertinent line is &quot;if really made a sine qua non of marriage, it necessarily annuls it&quot; ... i.e. if the couple resolved rather to end the marriage than to risk having more than 2 or 3 or 20 children, that would be an invalid marriage.<br /><br />Most certainly, a couple does not need to actively desire to have children for whom they are not able to provide (though, a first read of the quote might seem to affirm that; this simply cannot be the case).<br /><br />The marriage commitment, in other words, must not be conditional upon the number of children or the time of pregnancy.<br /><br />I hope that helps a bit ... I do admit that the quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia is more than a little odd and somewhat confusing! +Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-65734466648921445072011-12-13T10:41:58.097-08:002011-12-13T10:41:58.097-08:00Dear Father,
I stumbled across this passage in th...Dear Father,<br /><br />I stumbled across this passage in the Catholic Encyclopedia a couple of weeks ago and I think it&#39;s pertinent to the question of NFP and how it is used in some cases:<br /><br />&quot;There might be a sinful agreement between those contracting marriage which likewise nullifies their marriage — e.g., not to have more than one or two children, or not to have any children at all, until, in the judgment of the contracting parties, circumstances shall enable them to be provided for; or to divorce and marry someone else whenever they grow tired of each other. Such an agreement or condition denies the perpetual duties of matrimony, limits matrimonial rights, suspends the duty consequent on the use and exercise of those rights; if really made a sine qua non of marriage, it necessarily annuls it; the parties would wish to enjoy connubial intercourse, but evade its consequences.&quot;<br /><br />It would seem that to go at a pre-determined number of children is so serious as to possibly rendering a marriage null and void. Is this correct? And here we are not talking about whether the method to be used is licit or illicit. How would this work itself into the equation?<br /><br />In caritatem,<br />DavidDavidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-30836941841488922032011-12-11T16:14:19.850-08:002011-12-11T16:14:19.850-08:00@anonymous,
I&#39;m not sure where you are getting...@anonymous,<br />I&#39;m not sure where you are getting your ideas of what the Church does and does not teach ... but it is the height of arrogance, and truly insane pride to state that the Church is &quot;pandering to secular ideas of sexual morality&quot; ... how can you say such a thing?!<br /><br />The Church is against mutual masturbation. The Church has never said that genital stimulation outside of intercourse is acceptable. <br />I have no idea why you would think that the Church says such things!<br /><br />Perhaps your real problem is with Christopher West and his school ... but you must not speak so disrespectfully about our Mother the Church!<br /><br />Finally, your claim - that a man practicing NFP would suffer from premature ejaculation - is ludicrous ... you should blush to write such a thing (if you are a Christian woman).<br /><br />All that being said, I applaud you and your husband for desiring to live your married life in accord with the tradition of the Church and the law of God ... but don&#39;t let pride get in there (I see a lot of pride in that last comment) ... married life can be a great blessing, hence to be prideful about moral and spiritual progress in married life will lead to our downfall.<br /><br />Nevertheless, blessings to you both ... persevere in doing what is good ... rejoice always in the Lord. (and do be sure to discuss the matter with at least a couple of wise and holy priests) +Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-92110423112192437312011-12-11T15:06:35.972-08:002011-12-11T15:06:35.972-08:00Thank you, our conviction is that the Church appea...Thank you, our conviction is that the Church appears to me to be bending it&#39;s teaching to pander to secular ideas of sexual morality. <br /><br />How can it condone couples using ever more complex methods to determine when it Is &quot;safe&#39; to have sex ? Of course a couple so doing have a contraceptive mentality - why else do they do it ?<br /><br />The fact is that a man who follows the Church, and limits his sexual release to intercourse when &#39;safe&#39; will probably not be able to restrain himself during extended so called foreplay or during prolonged intercourse So as a sop to feminist notions of sexual equality the Church has now decided that what amounts to mutual masturbation after the act is compleat is now acceptable so that the wife is not left &#39;unsatisfied&#39; <br /><br />Of course love and affection between spouses is a vital part of a successful marriage but that is not supposed to be an excuse for sin and both enjoying the marital embrace while deliberately frustrating its purpose and sexual gratification for its own sack were both once sinful. <br /><br />Thank you for your concern, I am acutely aware of how challenging abstinence is for my husband, and although he says he finds total abstinence easier than the on off nature of prolonged NFP I realise he will need a lot of support. But fertility is a blessing from God and if we choose not to grow our family that is the sacrifice we will have to make. <br /><br />And for the record despite my comment earlier about feminism and equality of sexual pleasure although I do not believe that there is any justification for sexual stimulation which is not directed at completing the act ias God intended let me say that abstinence is very challenging for the wife !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-37771514959385227502011-12-09T19:24:26.751-08:002011-12-09T19:24:26.751-08:00@Anonymous,
Before you make a firm decision on thi...@Anonymous,<br />Before you make a firm decision on this matter, may I recommend that the two of you consult a faithful and orthodox priest? I think it would be good to talk with him a bit about the whole situation.<br /><br />Further, just fyi, St. Alphonsus Liguori (the Doctor of Moral Theology) says that we must be very careful when it comes to prolonged periods of abstinence, lest there we put ourselves into occasions of sin -- and that would mean more than simply temptation against chastity, but also any other number of frustrations that abstinence can cause in family life.<br />If abstinence is so difficult that it is causing us to sin (and especially in the case of the man), then we really need to rethink whether abstinence is the right choice -- and this can be difficult for men to admit, since men do not like to discuss such matters.<br /><br />All that being said, if a couple feels called and has discussed the matter with a good and holy priest, there may be circumstances in which prolonged abstinence would bring spiritual benefits.<br />But, as I say, it is very important to talk with a wise and well informed priest (and, I might add, it would be good to consult several faithful priests -- especially if the two of you are less than 50 years of age).<br /><br />Blessings to you! +Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-51936924735291531292011-12-09T16:22:38.823-08:002011-12-09T16:22:38.823-08:00Thank you for this debate. My husband and I decide...Thank you for this debate. My husband and I decided to practise NFP for what we believe to be just cause after our third child was born But have resently decided that we just don&#39;t feel comfortable with the moral implications. <br /><br />We firmly believe that the marital act was intended (as the Church say) to be primarily for procreation and although we accept that in using NFP we are not actually frustrating this during the actual act. But the fact is that we are choosing to enjoy the act only when we know (or at least believe) I am infertile. In other words we are trying to do so for pleasure with no intend to procreate which seems to us wrong. <br /><br />We have become used to long periods of abstinence since my husband travels a lot and because we also decided to abstain during pregnancy (which I know is unusual). So now we have decided to abstain. <br /><br />I know that the Church used to say that sex was only for procreation - I can&#39;t agree with that, as not least it would condem infertile couples to abstinence (a terrible irony when they desperately want to conceive) but we both believe that unless our wish to procreate is at least as great as our desire for pleasure - then that pleasure is sinful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-35811154743063965512011-12-06T09:48:39.877-08:002011-12-06T09:48:39.877-08:00As a side note, reading through the comments, I re...As a side note, reading through the comments, I realize that many people have a much more rigorous view of NFP and a misunderstanding of what the “contraceptive mentality” means...which is, I think, the reason for your post. However, rather than deny the connection it might be better to explain what exactly is meant and what is not meant by the term.<br /><br />Also, just a minor point...but I disagree with you also when you say: ”The “end”, “goal”, or “intention” of contraception (speaking in terms of moral theory) is to render a particular sexual act infertile.” With barrier methods this is true. However, with hormonal contraception (which still is classified as contraception) it is not. The “end” of hormonal contraception is not related to a particular sexual act...since it must be taken periodically (daily, monthly, quarterly, etc.) without reference to the sexual act at all. The “end” of hormonal contraception seems to be a temporary overall sterility rather than the infertility of a particular act.<br /><br />I will say again that I generally agree with you about NFP and I think it’s wonderful that you are teaching about it. Specifically, it is so very important for Catholics to understand WHY NFP is most definitely not contraceptive! Thank you for your ministry and vocation!<br />~ Busy Mom of ThreeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-62207998245861727222011-12-06T09:47:54.391-08:002011-12-06T09:47:54.391-08:00Fr: So that you understand my background, I was b...Fr: So that you understand my background, I was born and raised in a Novus Ordo parish and continue to happily attend the “new” Mass. I am temporarily using NFP and many of my friends have used it and/or are using it for various reasons. I agree with your later points in the article about just causes. For the most part, it seems, we are agreed on the subject of NFP. <br /><br />I cannot, however, agree with your point about the contraceptive mentality. I absolutely agree with you that there is nothing about NFP that is contraceptive...and I think that needs to be explained more frequently so that it is understood. In the article, though, you declare that since NFP is not contraceptive it cannot have a contraceptive mentality. Your argument seems to miss the distinction between “contraceptive” and “contraceptive mentality”. <br /><br />First of all, I don&#39;t believe it is possible for NFP to have a contraceptive mentality. The mentality refers to the attitude a person or couple has – not NFP itself. I don’t think it is possible for a method of acting to possess a mentality since it is not capable of thought or attitude. The argument is generally that NFP can be USED with a contraceptive mentality. <br />Secondly, one can easily have the mentality or attitude of a popular movement or action WITHOUT committing the action or being a part of the movement itself. Some examples, one can have a servile or slave mentality without actually being a slave; one can have the abortion mentality without ever having actually had an abortion; one can have a liberal mentality without voting or community organizing and such; one can have a fatherly mentality without ever having been a father. There is a difference between the attitude that belongs with a specific action or state of being and the act itself or state of being itself.<br />The mentality has NOTHING TO DO with NFP!!! It is rather something that can coincide with the use of NFP. I disagree with those who argue that it is somehow inherently a part of the practice.<br /><br />So what exactly is this “contraceptive mentality” then? There are various answers, of course, as the term has been around for decades. Generally, the &quot;contraceptive mentality&quot; includes taking for granted the separation of intercourse from procreation and easily applies to those who think there is a moral obligation or responsibility to not have children or to limit the number of children for whatever reason – especially those who think one has a duty to limit one’s family to zero- three children no matter what. <br />So just as one can have the attitude of a slave without actually being one, one can also have the attitude of the contracepting culture and contracepting couples without actually being a contracepting couple – the attitude that there is a duty to have as few kids as possible. Let’s get our token one, or our boy and girl and then stop. This is the attitude I have heard associated with the phrase “contraceptive mentality”. I will agree that it is less common than some make it sound...but that doesn&#39;t mean it doesn&#39;t exist.<br /><br />The mentality applies not just to married couples, but to single, celibate and/or aged people as well. When Grandpa expects that son and daughter-in-law are going to stop after having their second child, that is an example of the “contraceptive mentality”. And so on. Even though it is perhaps impossible and definitely unnecessary for Grandpa to use contraception, he still subscribes to the contraceptive mentality prevalent in our culture. <br /><br />Blogger cut me off so more to follow!<br />~ Busy Mom of ThreeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-87369554041943267432011-12-02T11:32:49.269-08:002011-12-02T11:32:49.269-08:00@Fr. Gardner,
Also, your last comment about how wi...@Fr. Gardner,<br />Also, your last comment about how widely NFP should be promoted is a red herring ... I&#39;m not talking about how and when NFP should be used ... I am saying that NFP is not contraceptive (as you have explicitly stated it is [and you really should retract that statement]) nor does it carry a &quot;contraceptive mentality&quot;.Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-70075976429046584052011-12-02T11:31:05.224-08:002011-12-02T11:31:05.224-08:00Fr. Gardner,
I wonder which of the acts you mentio...Fr. Gardner,<br />I wonder which of the acts you mention prevents conception?<br />Reading mucus? No.<br />Measuring temps? No.<br />Charting? No.<br />Having sex? No.<br /><br />The one thing which prevents the act from bearing fruit is that the woman is infertile ... but the couple didn&#39;t do anything to make that happen ... and NFP didn&#39;t make the woman to be infertile.<br /><br />Thus, there is nothing which prevents conception (excepting the natural cycle of the woman&#39;s body) ... and NFP is in no way contraceptive.<br /><br />Father ... NFP is a means of regulating birth ... so is perpetual continence ... and neither of these &quot;prevent&quot; conception.<br />Please give a magisterial authority which states that NFP &quot;prevents&quot; conception.<br /><br />I have already cited the Church&#39;s teaching -- NFP and contraception are &quot;completely different&quot;.Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-1112833594793892582011-12-02T11:04:47.385-08:002011-12-02T11:04:47.385-08:00@Vince K,
That reasoning is unsound ... lust is si...@Vince K,<br />That reasoning is unsound ... lust is similar to adultery and leads to it; but NFP is not contraceptive nor does it lead to contraception ... a selfish use of NFP is nothing like contraception and therefore is not a contraceptive mentality. <br /><br />The Church has stated very clearly that NFP and contraception are &quot;completely different&quot;.Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-84456969586861666072011-12-02T07:25:43.994-08:002011-12-02T07:25:43.994-08:00Dear Fr. Erlenbush,
Periodic continence is condit...Dear Fr. Erlenbush,<br /><br />Periodic continence is conditionally licit birth regulation (HV,16).<br /><br />Birth regulation necessarily implies some form of prevention. In the case of periodic continence this prevention involves reading mucus, measuring temperatures, charting cycles, having sexual relations exclusively during the “safe period,” etc. (Note: Abstinence, of itself, is not birth regulation, since there is no birth to regulate.)<br /><br />Therefore, mindful of the Lord’s admonition (“Let the children come to me; do not prevent them…” Mt. 19:14), periodic continence should not be promoted on a widespread basis, but only conditionally. <br /> <br />Fr. W. M. Gardner<br /><br />P. S. Mamas are great!!!Fr. W. M. Gardnernoreply@blogger.com